ZOREF v. GLASSMAN

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

Under the circumstances of this case, the Supreme Court did not improvidently exercise its discretion in dismissing the complaint since the plaintiffs willfully failed to comply with its order entered July 29, 1997 ( see, CPLR 3126; Frias v. Fortini, 240 A.D.2d 467; Kubacka v. Town of N. Hempstead, 240 A.D.2d 374).

Miller, J. P., Thompson, McGinity and Luciano, JJ., concur.